Jump to content

FleshJeb

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,718

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Posts posted by FleshJeb

    Steam Summer Sale!

    in The Lounge

    Posted · Edited by FleshJeb
    Steam trade

    I thought I was done, but after a tip I am very tempted to buy SpaceChem. It sounds and looks like one of those deceptively simple games that turn out to be the hardest.

    I got about halfway through SpaceChem before I had to start looking at walkthroughs. It does get VERY hard. Learned a lot about state machines though.

    Similar but easier game: http://www.bigpharmagame.com/ I'll be picking it up shortly. The publishing company has a really good rep, and is responsible for games like Gratuitous Space Battles, and Democracy 3.

    EDIT:

    I just got a Cerulean Carmouth, you can have it for the low low price of nothing at all. PMing you info

    Space plane inline decoupler

    in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion

    Posted

    I never understood why would we need those. IRL planes don't need such things. At least not those I am aware of. Decoupling a part of fuselage of your plane would seriously mess up it's aerodynamics and CoM. Mk2 parts are dedicated for atmo uses. And you want those to take-off and land in one piece. For other stuff you take long cylinders.

    There's some precedent...

    640px-F-111E_Escape_Pod.JPG

    Best Way to Create a multiple docking port setup?

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted

    Also keep in mind that only one of the docking port connections will allow fuel flow, and there's no telling which one it will be. My experiments with a pilot connection that sticks out a little farther have worked more often than not, but it's still a gamble. This may give you the oddest fuel flow, leading to imbalance, leading to your craft going in circles.

    Great post. Thanks Laie.

    Just came in to point out that TAC Fuel Balancer makes it possible to mitigate this problem.

    Devnote Tuesday: A big announcement

    in KSP1 The Daily Kerbal

    Posted

    Is... is this the same Flying Tiger that's developing the port?

    http://www.ftmobile.com/Products.aspx

    I have something shameful to admit... I actually visualized your head exploding when the announcement was made.

    I'm sure a BUNCH of us have been googling like mad, and we'll all probably find this: http://sardoose.rustedlogic.net/reviews/jturbo/index.htm

    Here's the serious question: This is just a pass-through company, right? Do they just contract stuff out to rent-a-developers and take a cut? Companies of that ilk exist in the civil engineering industry also, and I've seen a few in the last 20+ years.

    Aerial cranes with MechJeb

    in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials

    Posted · Edited by FleshJeb

    Take a look at Cupcake's thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/27424-Cupcake-s-Dropship-Dealership?p=691402&viewfull=1#post691402

    He builds very responsive VTOLs by supplementing the jets with small bursts from rockets.

    If you go with strict air-breathing, you'll just have to fly very carefully, and always be thinking 30-60 seconds in advance. That can actually be a fun challenge.

    EDITED link above to his retired craft: Looks like he quit doing airbreathers because 1.x is not fun. ;-) However, the low-altitude performance is still similar.

    KSP 1.0.3 - ETA ? (waiting for it, cause mods^^)

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    They won't loose most of the players. The majority here play the game since before 1.0. They are used to all kinds of bugs.

    I'm not sure about that. I think there's quite a few of us that still play the older versions. I've played 1.x for a few hours, but I don't see any compelling reason to upgrade until it's had some more work put into it. Particularly, balancing and tuning the new physics. They're so poorly implemented as to be counterintuitive at the moment.

    Should the USA go metric?

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    Every US engineer and scientist I ever talked to uses metric system at work.

    I'm in Civil/Survey. We use decimal feet, and we LIKE it! Of course 0.01 feet is more or less 1/8", so conversions aren't too bad. Oh wait, we use US Survey feet. The conversion is 1200m/3937USft = 0.3048006.... International feet are 0.3048m/ft. exactly

    That makes a BIG difference if you're converting coordinates around 6x10^6 feet.

    What's REALLY sad is that CalTrans was operating in metric for a few years, and then they went back to English units:

    http://enr.construction.com/news/transportation/archives/050314.asp

    Sadness. Just found another thing that was broke in 1.0

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    If you want to match real-world parameters, then your Ion drive should use ten times the power, deliver 20 times the ISP, and deliver one ten-thousandth of the thrust.

    Look to burn times ranging from dozens to hundreds of days.

    Actually, the ISP is really close now. Current real-life tech is listed at 20-50km/s exhaust velocity. This is range for ISP of 2040-5099.

    The Quad-Grid tech I posted upthread is higher, of course, but that's in the bench-test phase.

    Old Aerodynamics

    in KSP1 Mods Discussions

    Posted

    It took me forever to find a reference to that bug:

    http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/98232-Colliding-into-building-3km-away

    A) it's fairly common.

    B) seems to occur after a long flight or high timewarp.

    C) seems to only happen to wings. Are you getting it with rockets too?

    D) no known cause or solution.

    Someone said approaching KSC from the north, instead of headed down the runway, worked. Maybe try landing out in the hills and rolling in?

    You should definitely post the details of your flights in that thread (type of craft, how far away you got, if you hit really high timewarp, are you using the stock 1.0 aero physics, or is it with the "old" options turned on), and if you have any success in beating it. They'll be able to offer you more help, and it will be good to pass on more data.

    Good luck!

    Sadness. Just found another thing that was broke in 1.0

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted

    No, I'm fairly certain there's actually a physical hard limit for how much thrust ion propulsion can produce. It's only a few newtons at the theoretical maximum, I think. I can't remember the mechanism that restricts the thrust but I know there is one.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-Stage_4-Grid

    The PDF linked in footnote 1 was fascinating. It looks like the limiting factor is the weight of the power generating equipment. "25 kg/kW or less"

×
×
  • Create New...